oldiesman

A real Dr. would tell me I'm a normal man. Can't you discuss the issue without resorting to personal attacks and character assassinations? Danny, so you do not fantasize about young women, ever? Be honest now -- its nothing to be ashamed of. Its part of who we are as American males.

I suspect Solomon didn't have to drug women; he was the King and could have any woman he wanted. He was the King and women flocked to him; just like they flocked to Wierwille. Like some kind of a rock star. I don't know why he had to use drugs though; he had all the women without them. That was wrong for sure. But maybe he did it just to loosen them up? You know the uptight ones. I never tried it, but I heard that some of these date rape drugs enhance the sexual desire. Sort of like a sexual aid. BTW most if not all men fantisize about young women. That is a fact of nature and any guy who disputes this is either lying or gay.

Hello folks. :) Writing to you directly from the bosses computer now. :) I hope everyone had a nice weekend and truly hope we can discuss some issues this week without all the personal attacks.

Sounds almost like a George Carlin plagiarism. :) Happy Weekend, one and all!

This is one of those nebulous grey areas that is wide open to debate. Is this a human life or "potential" human life. Is this life or potential life a blessing from God, if it was possibly conceived in sin? (adultery, fornication) Does this life or potential life have a soul? ******************* We know TWI's perspective that the fetus is potential life that doesn't have a soul. From that perspective, it wasn't yet a human life taken. We were in TWI for years and that was the situation. We assented to it and agreed with it then, that was what we agreed to and believed. This is one reason why I believe the leaders who encouraged women to keep their commitment to the Corps program, were not doing evil by that. They should not be condemned.

Tom, for purposes of this discussion on oaths, we need to define our terms to make sure we are on the same page. Perhaps we can save this for next week, but its getting awefully close to the end of the day, and its FRIDAY, and you know what that means. :)

I still believe its the right way to go, and biblical, even though it may be used against someone if they fail to live up to that standard. Golly, it isn't manipulation to expect someone to keep their word.

How do you define "wrong"? One persons "wrong" may not be another persons "wrong". Difficult to answer these questions as they can go different ways depending upon the facts of a situation and the heart and mindset of the person making the commitment or swearing the oath. I'll get back to you on that. :)

Oh yes, that was never disputed by me. Which was why I questioned Marsha's return to his motorcoach the next day. I don't know, seems like she was just looking for trouble and possibly encouraged additional abuse. Who knows?

It doesn't exonerate him. But I still think its possible that many women wanted to have sex with him as well, and that fact could have just possibly encouraged him right along. BTW Doojable, thank you for not attacking me. :) It's good to just read a calm post.

What the Hey will you please cite your sources. My only ally on this thread is getting hammered.

Well Rascal, that is your impression. But if you are saying that that was everyone's impression, I would disagree with you. you can't speak for everyone. I know folks (myself included) who were not told or ever had that impression. "if you leave the Corps, you will get possessed and die" I don't know Rascal.

All men are born with a sexual predatory nature. One of Dr. Wierwille's problems was that he allowed that nature to get the better of him at various times in his life. They were excesses; but not quite as bad I think as Solomon's excesses who had 700-1000 wives. Maybe Wierwille's problem was he was born in the wrong time period? Maybe if he had been around in Solomon's time, or other times when men had many many wives, he wouldn't have been hassled so much by some posters.

It has not been challenged by me that VPW bore responsibility when he allegedly raped women. I never challenged that point. He does.

That would depend on the heart and mindset of the person making the commitment.

Wordwolf, In practical terms, what then are you saying the Word of God says? Taking a four-year oath to complete the corps program is ungodly? wrong? How about taking an oath when one pledges alliegence to the Flag, and to the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands? Is that wrong or ungodly, according to the bible? ******************* Larry, are you back?

Lifted Up, I'm willing to have a high level of debate, but when dealing with debaters who consistently engage in distracting personal attacks and character assassinations against me, I try to add a little humor once in a while. In my thread to Dave, I tried to be somewhat humorous and I hope some folks took it that way. But I AM sending him his $5.00! :)

You mean they didn't inform you that you were signing up for a four-year commitment? Well I must tell you Rascal, I definitely got that impression when I signed up.

I'm not trying to "focus" on them; just offer the suggestion and possible debating point that folks who participated in Wierwille's excesses may have done so willingly. You seem to want to portray most or all women as helpless victims. But it really depends on the facts and circumstances. BTW, Happy Friday. :)

Wordwolf, So then you're representing that God's Word teaches us that we don't have to keep our promises?

David, Now before you go patting yourself on the back for such a kewl post; the papers you sent me really were not that much more valuable than toilet paper. You sent me two items, the 37-page letter to the Trustees of 1987 by John Lynn, et al.; and the Notes to the Clergy meetings of November 1986. The Clergy Meetings pretty much were vague condemnations from Chris Geer, with no real substance. The Patron Saint of Aloofness at his best. I mean, I've gotten more wisdom from one of Rascal's sentences on a bad day. Such statements by Chris Geer like: --the Corps is going to sleep, forsaking biblical responsibility --there has been abundant insanity at the level of the trustees --massive upsurge of insanity in the Way of the USA resulting in a virtual neglect of God's Word --you wrongly took an action that was not scriptural. About the only thing of any specificity in that paper was Geer's condemnation of John Schoenheits paper on adultery, and the concurrence of the Trustees. Then there was the 37-page letter to the Trustees on February 1987 by John & Pat Lynn, Tom Reahard, Ralph Dubofsky & Robert Belt. An abundance of vague and ambiguous pious platitudes, quoting and praising our father in the word and the teachings of Dr. Wierwille throughout the entire letter, and how the Trustees should get back to them; with no real substance or specific reproof about anything. Nothing specific confronting the sexual promiscuity, adultery, fornication, druggings, plagiarism. Nada. Now about the vast amount of funds you sacrificed to send me this information, you wrote in a cover letter: David, I think you reminded me about this money you sacrificed in a previous post, and also mention it now again. SO I am going to send you $5.00; the $2.00 for the copying costs and $2.67 for the postage fee and throw in a tip. This way I don't have to hear your whining anymore. Now if you would please excuse me, I have to go to the bathroom.

I think I get what you're saying Lifted Up. In other words, someone who believes in pro-choice should be consistent and carry that belief over into twi. i.e., condemning twi for murder because abortions were allegedly "forced", not because "abortion is murder", would be inconsistent. or, someone who believes in pro-life should be just as consistent with all groups and everyone, as with twi If I misunderstand you, please correct.

I never suggested he was. But what do you think about Marsha going back a second time to his motorcoach? Is she exempt from criticism? I think, by her going back a second time after she left the first time, she was facilitating and participating in any "abuse" that may have occurred thereafter. BTW please refrain from namecalling. Let's keep the debate on a higher level.

Ok Skyrider, but in practice, if someone left the Corps, twi allowed those folks to return to the corps if they wanted, or go to twig if they wanted. This is a fact, whether or not they desired folks to come back in. Called by God? Actually to this day, I'm not so sure.

A vow doesn't necessarily have to originate with God in order for God wanting the person to fulfill it. (Numbers 30:2) But if you are saying that all corps vows were ungodly.. well I just disagree with that opinion.